On Monday, a Maricopa County judge issued a 10-page ruling outlining why he was ordering the Arizona Republican Party and several of its attorneys to pay more than $18,000 expended by Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs to defend against what the judge deemed “a groundless lawsuit.”
Judge John Hannah Jr. of the Maricopa County Superior Court awarded $18,237.59 in attorneys’ fees and costs against the Arizona Republican Party and the Wilenchik & Bartness Law Firm, as well as attorneys Lee Miller and John Douglas “Jack” Wilenchik, for a lawsuit authorized by AZ GOP Chair Kelli Ward.
The plaintiff sued Maricopa County after election officials conducted a statutorily-mandated sampling hand count, or audit, just days after the Nov. 3 election. The lawsuit alleged officials illegally selected ballots to audit based on a set percentage of voting centers rather than a percentage of precincts.
The judge’s decision to award attorney’s fees appears to have been colored by the actions of the attorneys for the Arizona Republican Party in filing the lawsuit in the first place.
“By their own admission, the responsible individuals here made no serious pre-filing effort to determine the validity of the claims,” Hannah wrote. “They say the complaint was drafted on the day the hand count audit issue came to their attention, after business hours, and filed the next day. Their haste is not an excuse for filing a groundless lawsuit.”
He also wrote that the lawsuit was based in part on “flimsy excuses” and that one tactic used by the plaintiff “bespeaks a lack of good faith.” Another argument put forth by the attorneys was “disingenuous,” Hannah said.
Hannah also noted one of the plaintiff’s attorneys “was especially well equipped to give advice about the details of election procedure, having served as Deputy Secretary of State and worked on such matters.”
Starting in 2020, Maricopa County and some other counties did away with requiring voters to show up at specific polling places which represent small geographical precincts within the county. Instead, larger voting centers were set up at which any county voter could cast a ballot printed out on-site specifically for each voter.
The Arizona Election Procedure Manual (EPM) published by Hobbs’ office provides instructions for counties which utilize voting centers to conduct its hand counts based on the same percentage as counties which use a precinct polling station process. There is also a statute which refers to the EPM as being part of the state’s election process.
Maricopa County conducted its hand count accordingly and reported a 100 percent result. However, the Arizona Republican Party sued the county in an attempt to force a do-over of the hand count by precincts. At issue, the lawsuit contended, was voter confidence in Maricopa County’s election results.
Hobbs was not named in the lawsuit, even though she is the state’s top election official. The judge approved her to intervene in the case, which led Hobbs to retain private counsel at taxpayer expense.
Hannah dismissed the lawsuit within days and the secretary of state then applied for sanctions to recoup that expense.
The judge may not have liked how the Arizona Republican Party and its lawyers conducted themselves in filing the lawsuit, but their response to Hobbs’ request for attorney’s fees certainly did not set well with the judge.
The response alleged that if Hannah granted the sanctions, he would cause the public to question the Court’s impartiality “and undermine respect for the courts.”
“It is a threat to the rule of law posing as an expression of concern,” the judge wrote. “It is direct evidence of bad faith.”
Hannah’s ruling also points out several Arizona counties used voting centers for the 2020 General Election and conducted hand counts based on a sampling of those voting centers. But only Maricopa County was sued.
“It would have been simple to file suit against the Secretary of State and each of those counties,” the judge noted. “That the plaintiff did not proceed that way suggest that its concern was something other than ‘strict compliance and election integrity.’”
The judge also commented that the Arizona Republican Party failed “to conduct itself respectfully” during the election case, and he pushed back on the plaintiff’s argument that the party’s actions were protected by the First Amendment,
“No citation is needed for the proposition that the First Amendment does not give a litigant the right to file and maintain a groundless lawsuit,” Hannah wrote.
Hannah’s order notes that the payees are responsible for the $18,237.59 award both jointly and severally. An appeal is expected.